Tracking systems are known in the art for tracking information pertaining to mechanical components, commonly referred to generally as assets, particularly for addressing asset integrity issues such as maintenance, repair, and replacement. For example, such tracking systems may be employed in industries that utilize hydraulic fluid systems for controlling machinery. Hydraulic fluids systems are used in a large variety of industries, including in systems to generate driving power in vehicle transmissions, construction and mining equipment, farm equipment, undersea oil and gas drilling operations, and numerous others.
Hydraulic fluid systems are assembled from various component parts, including for example a wide variety of hoses and fittings. Each component hose or fitting may vary depending upon its role in the system. For example, hoses and fittings for high pressure hydraulic lines may have different properties (e.g., length, thickness, elasticity, bendability, material composition, etc.) as compared to such components for low pressure hydraulic fluid lines. In addition, component properties may vary depending upon environmental conditions of usage. For example, an undersea drilling operation is exposed to substantially different temperature and pressure conditions as compared to conditions of operation of an on-highway vehicle transmission. Component parts, therefore, will having differing properties as warranted to withstand any particular conditions of operation. It will be appreciated that although hydraulic systems are used as an illustrative example, asset variations are significant in any mechanical, machine, or equipment-using industry.
It is imperative, therefore, that mechanical assets be readily identifiable for asset integrity issues, particularly for maintenance, repair, and replacement of component parts. In the event of a component failure, extensive equipment downtime can be result in significant financial losses. Downtime periods may be extended if a correct component part or asset cannot be identified efficiently. It will be appreciated from the above example of hydraulic hoses and fittings, that the variety of component parts is vast. Many component parts may have some visual or superficial similarities rendering it difficult by simple eyeing to determine the correct part. In addition, some component properties may not be readily identifiable without a precise measurement or inspection (e.g., a precise hose length, or a fitting diameter). Asset identification, therefore, can be complex, and inefficient time spent identifying the correct asset increases downtime. Downtime further may be exacerbated should an initial asset identification be incorrect, requiring multiple iterations of the asset identification process. Accordingly, financial losses from extended downtimes from inefficient or incorrect asset identification present a serious issue for a variety of industries.
To reduce downtime, tracking systems have been developed for improved asset identification for maintenance, repair, and replacement. In one known system, an adhesive tag is fixed to an asset, such as a component part, the tag including basic part identifying information. For example, the tag may include a unique manufacturer part identification (ID), a corresponding customer part ID, a pertinent date (e.g., an assembly, manufacturing, or installation date), and customized printed information such as a part description or some other simple instruction or related information.
The tag further may include a coded portion. The coded portion may be a passive tag code, like a barcode, or an energizable code like an RFID tag or comparable near-field communication (NFC) device. The coded portion may be read by a corresponding conventional reading device such as a scanner. The reading device in turn may be in electronic communication with a database over a local or non-local network, such as the Internet. The database may include additional information about the component part or asset. Examples of the database information may include duplicative information contained on the tag itself, as well as additional information such as, for example, customer information, bills of material, application data, maintenance history or maintenance cycle, certification information, components drawings, and the like. The database in general may be populated in any suitable manner with useful information about the asset.
Such a tracking system may be used as follows. In the event of a report of a part failure, a technician in the field can read the tag on the component with the scanner or other suitable reading device. Through the network connection, the information read from the tag with the reading device may be matched to the database information about the component. Depending upon the capabilities of the reading device, the technician may be able to order the part, order related parts if warranted, and even update the database. For example, the reading device may be incorporated into a smartphone, tablet computer, or like mobile communication device with input/output computer-like functionality, that would permit a technician to enter part replacement and other maintenance orders and otherwise update the database information in any suitable manner.
Because of the electronic communication among the tag, reading device, and database, the asset identification and any related maintenance orders are performed with high efficiency and accuracy. Accuracy includes not only generalized part information, but also can encompass any pre-processing requirements such as sizing (e.g., cutting a given hose type to the required length). With such accuracy and efficiency, downtime is reduced, both in reduced processing time and the avoidance of mistaken part identifications.
The tracking system of the nature described above has proven effective for asset identification and related maintenance. Such system, however, essentially is a reactive, rather than a proactive, system. In other words, a component failure or similar trigger event (e.g., a scheduled inspection of the particular component) must prompt the investigation of the particular tag. The tracking system in and of itself does not provide any advanced warning or probability determination that would permit a proactive maintenance procedure in advance of an actual failure. Downtime can be reduced if a technician were able to identify assets with imminent integrity issues prior to an actual failure. More generally, even absent an imminent failure issue, it would be beneficial for a technician in the field to know the use or performance state of assets relative to potential integrity issues for resource allocation and planning, maintenance scheduling, predictive failure assessments, and the like.
One option for acquiring more proactive information is simply for a technician to periodically inspect assets at a given location or constituting components within a given system or piece of equipment (e.g., a vehicle or other machine). In such an inspection, a technician systematically can scan a related group of tags, thereby acquiring current status information from the database and updating the database as needed. Periodic inspections by scanning individual tags, however, are time consuming and non-targeted.
Some assets may have predetermined specifications pertaining to useful life. Useful life, for example, may be measured in chronological time or cycle life, upon which maintenance or replacement is to be performed. Such measures, however, are imprecise, as actual useful life can vary depending upon local operating conditions. Actual environmental or operating conditions that vary from an average or norm, such as weather, temperature, moisture, pressure, and others, can extend or reduce useful life from a predictive specification. In addition, even with a stricter adherence to useful life specifications, the tracking system by itself lacks a linkage to a technician for automatic notification. There still must be some trigger event, such as scanning a tag or a manual notice by a person monitoring the tracking system, to inform the technician of a needed maintenance or other integrity issue. Conventional tracking systems, therefore, lack integration with real-time and actual performance information, which precludes a more proactive asset integrity management system.